see gates archive drives these things
are freakin cheap for how much capacity
you get I can actually link my drive
cost calculator spreadsheet that I used
to make this chart under the video by
the way but when I started looking into
picking up some of these drives for our
long term storage NAS I heard the
performance totally sucked so I asked
Seagate to send a few of them over and I
went on a mission to figure out if
there's a way to mask their performance
penalty while still getting the cost
benefit to build the cheapest 100
terabyte storage box possible well my
original concept ended up totally not
working that's a new one right but I
learned a bunch of interesting stuff in
the process and here it is
cooller masters master case maker five
features they're freeform modular system
allowing you to customize adjust and
upgrade make it yours at the link in the
video description now before I can
explain why archive drives are so cheap
and at the same time why their
performance is less than ideal for
certain applications we need a little
bit of background without getting into
too much grimy detail data is stored on
hard drives by arranging the polarity of
the tiny magnets that cover the hard
disk shaped thing inside called a
platter according to the instructions
given by your operating system a
magnetized bit is interpreted as a one
and a non magnetized bit is interpreted
as a zero so you lay down a few billion
ones and zeros in the right order read
them back and boom next thing you know
you're playing crysis 3 okay then so
traditionally these little magnets were
arranged laying flat in concentric
circles on the platter this is called
longitudinal magnetic recording it's
easier but eventually hard drive
manufacturers ran out of room and
couldn't increase capacity any more
without making their platters so big
that the latency penalty of moving the
read and write heads around would be too
high not to mention that I'm pretty sure
that no one wants a 10 terabyte disk in
their laptop if it has to be the size of
a vinyl freaking record so the first
solution then was perpendicular magnetic
recording standing those magnets up
instead of laying them down this
required more complex read and write
heads the the record needle type arm
that moves around and makes that ticking
noise whenever your drive is working
hard but has gotten us all the way to 10
terabytes so far with maybe a little bit
more Headroom left before the magnets
again just can't get any smaller which
is where shingled magnetic recording
comes in now the read component of the
head remember the record needle
thing is narrower than the right
component so by layering the magnetic
tracks half on top of each other like
the shingles on a roof much more data
can be stored without moving to more
exotic materials to make the magnets
smaller or even drastically redesigning
the heads unfortunately this means that
while you can read at pretty much full
speed the eight terabyte archive drives
that we used for our tests are rated at
a hundred and ninety megabytes per
second reads way more than enough for
the gigabit networks that most home and
small office users are running right
speeds can be devastatingly slow
especially when they're random you see
the right head is so wide that it would
actually overwrite both the intended
track and the next one over on the drive
so it has to read the data that it's
going to accidentally overwrite store
that somewhere else either in a
solid-state cache or in a reserved part
of the disk platter somewhere else
organize it and then finally
sequentially write back both the data
it's supposed to be writing in the first
place and that data it had to shuffle
this is called a read modify write and
it can be slow as all hell so let's talk
then about my idea I wanted to use the
reasonable read speeds the low cost and
the 24/7 operation ratings of archived
drives in one of my line tech on raid
systems I wanted to combine that with
the reliability and all-around high
performance of enterprise capacity
drives to get the best of both worlds so
the way on raid works is that your data
is actually written directly to the
individual disks in the array which is
great because in the event of a
catastrophic failure let's say you lose
two drives simultaneously at least
anything written to the rest of the
drives is still there and an additional
drive or two drives acts as a parity
disk that lets data from a single or two
depending how many parity discs you have
failed discs be rebuilt in the
of a less catastrophic failure the
problem is that while archive drives
seem to be okay as standalone individual
disks the worst use case I could find
for them was in parity protected raid
arrays with their poor random
performance being pointed to as an
unnecessary risk during a rebuild
operation so the data rebuilding process
actually puts more strain than normal on
the rest of the drives and so the data
across all the disks is in jeopardy
until the corrupted or failed drives
data has been rebuilt so now we're 70%
of the way through the video and we
finally come to my idea I figured by
using archived drives in the array and
an enterprise drive for parody and to
replace any failed archived drives I
could mask both the poor random write
performance and the slow rebuild times
of the archived drives and as you'll see
from these performance numbers it didn't
work out that way at all so my
heterogeneous drive mixture
configuration had worse performance than
both all enterprise capacity drives
which I expected and worse than a pure
archive drive setup which I suspect is
due to the mismatched disk spindle speed
so that's kind of a drag I guess but
there's some good news here for me
anyway and that is that in an unrated
vironment I can either settle for 50
megabyte per second write speeds about
half of what a gigabit network can
handle in the default configuration
where it spins up only the disk to which
it's writing directly and the parity
disk to reduce power consumption in disk
where the cost of performing
read-modify-write operations all the
time or if I use their turbo write mode
that spins all the disks during access
allowing for much faster reconstruct
writes
I can still even with the cheapest
drives I could find that are rated for
24/7 operation get my hundred megabytes
per second since I'm not striping data
the way that I would in a more
traditional raid which to be clear
archive drives still are not recommended
for so thanks for watch
guys if this video sucked you know what
to do but if it was awesome get
subscribed hit that like button or maybe
even check out the link to where to buy
the stuff that we featured at Amazon in
the video description I have my full
hard drive like Nazz capacity and price
calculator excel sheet down there which
you can you're more than welcome to try
out also linked in the description is
our merch store which has cool shirts
like this one and our community forum
which you should totally join now that
you're done doing all that stuff you're
probably wondering what to watch next so
click that little button in the top
right corner to check out our video from
last year which inspired a lot of this
storage server stuff that I've been
doing where we lost pretty much all of
our data temporarily or did Irene the
suspense I don't know
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.